https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239707 The Tribunal ruled that the Respondent's action of returning the consent application without processing it was unjustified, directing that the application should have been considered properly. Regarding the challenge to the impugned order declaring the business as a Collective Investment Scheme (CIS) without SEBI registration, the Tribunal upheld the order, finding that the scheme conducted by the Appellants met the criteria of a CIS. The appeal was dismissed, but the compliance period was extended to eighteen months with periodic reporting to SEBI due to the complexity of the repayment process and the large number of investors involved. en-us Tue, 23 Jul 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 19 Nov 2013 11:35:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239707 The Tribunal ruled that the Respondent's action of returning the consent application without processing it was unjustified, directing that the application should have been considered properly. Regarding the challenge to the impugned order declaring the business as a Collective Investment Scheme (CIS) without SEBI registration, the Tribunal upheld the order, finding that the scheme conducted by the Appellants met the criteria of a CIS. The appeal was dismissed, but the compliance period was extended to eighteen months with periodic reporting to SEBI due to the complexity of the repayment process and the large number of investors involved. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 23 Jul 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239707